"I believe in some form of universal basic income," he told CBS’s Scott Pelley, citing concerns about technological unemployment. "I’m pro-single-payer health care. Is that right-wing or is that left-wing anymore? Well, if you have a lot of people, a large swath of the company, or country, are suffering, then I think that we owe it to all Americans to do right by them and to help them out." . . .

Cernovich is less a traditional conservative than he is a Trumpist — and Trumpism in its purest, alt-right variety cares more about white working-class identity politics than traditional conservatism. More and more, Trump fans are seeing single-payer as part of that.

Alt-rightists and other Trump-loyal conservatives — Richard Spencer, VDARE writer and ex–National Review staffer John Derbyshire, Newsmax CEO and Trump friend Christopher Ruddy, and onetime Donald Trump Jr. speechwriter and Scholars & Writers for Trump head F.H. Buckley — all endorsed various models of single-payer in recent months and years.

This is F.H. Buckley:

Steve Bannon has said the Republicans will become a party of ‘economic nationalism.’ No one has bothered to define this, but here’s one thing it must mean: We’re going to treat Americans better than non-Americans. We’re going to see that Americans have jobs, medical care and an enviable safety net.

Sets up some interesting tests for liberals: would you work with the Steve Bannons of the world to achieve single-payer healthcare? I would.

It remains to be seen whether the Alt-Right has any actual power in Washington; so far the Ryans and McConnells remain firmly in control of the Republican Party. But I wonder if maybe the rigid ideological standoff of the past 40 years might be in for a shakeup in a few years.

1 comment:

"Sets up some interesting tests for liberals: would you work with the Steve Bannons of the world to achieve single-payer healthcare? I would."

The wrinkle, of course, is that these people care "more about white working-class identity politics than traditional conservatism".

So when one of them says, "I believe in some form of universal basic income", you have to append that with "...for white people". And when one of them champions single payer healthcare "for Americans", the caveat is that they intend to redefine who is American to exclude minorities.

Would I work with the Steve Bannons of the world to achieve single-payer healthcare? Only so long as I could be absolutely sure I wasn't furthering any other aspect of their hideous agendas.

If I were a congressperson voting on a bill that focused solely on healthcare reform, then sure - let's both vote yes. But I wouldn't buy their cooperation by selling out my principles or furthering theirs. If, say, the bill came with a rider which stripped minorities of certain "minor" legal protections, and the alt-right expected me to turn a blind eye, then I'd absolutely vote against it.

But then, I'm not a career politician. I value my principles and my convictions far more than political expediency - but many congresspeople simply don't. If they could achieve a popular political "win" with their consituents and improve their chances of reelection at the cost of quietly throwing minorities under the bus, I absolutely believe many of them would.

And that's the danger of recognizing, legitimizing, and considering making any kind of deals with the so-called "alt right" - or as they used to be called, the "white supremacists". These people are genocidal monsters. They haven't somehow magically become less racist and violent - they've just rebranded themselves with a shiny new coat of paint, hoping that if they hide their true colors by smiling and acting respectable, people will be duped long enough for them to get their foot in the door and start normalizing their hatred on a systematic and legal level.